subscriptions_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered, and the description adds nothing beyond the trivial 'all'. It says nothing about the unfiltered admin-wide scope, pagination behavior, or ordering, which is the meaningful behavioral context left unanswered for a list tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with nothing extraneous, which is well front-loaded. However, it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, offering no detail that would earn the terseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials to call it are present. It still omits sibling differentiation and any statement of scope or return shape, leaving it only minimally adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both 'size' and 'start' are fully documented in the schema, giving the baseline of 3. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning such as default ordering or how offset interacts with the default page size.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a verb and resource ('Get all subscriptions'), so the basic operation is identifiable, and the word 'all' hints at unfiltered listing. However, it draws no boundary against siblings such as subscriptions_get_by_user_id or subscriptions_get_by_username, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone why it would pick this tool over those.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisite information, and no named alternative. The description merely asserts existence of the operation without helping the agent choose it in a crowded sibling set.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.